A bit of soul searching with the S, M, and Pentax 645D - help needed!!

[bilbrown]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've recently been searching searching searching for the proper render solution for higher res files. For the last three years I have dropped my Canon EQ, and switched first to Fuji, then tried Sony A7 series, and finally settled on M system as my go to. I have very few (if any complaints).

 

To be honest, the first camera system I ever really encountered was the M when I was in my 20s, around the neck of my old poetry teacher - Allen Ginsberg. Allen introduced me to the first real artist-photographer I ever knew, Robert Frank, and little did I know almost 20 years later I would be here with other Leica enthusiasts talking shop. I'm happy for it. It feels right. I am at home here.

 

But I needed something else. 

 

It could be my technical skills aren't optimum. I will admit I am not the most technical photographer. I understand zone focusing, and enjoy the rangefinder of the M very much. I have settled into my system set-up of choice, an M8 as a walk around, an M240 for serious shoots, and the Summicron line of 28 and 35mm do me mostly fine. I shoot people. Mostly fashion-like lifestyle portraits and emotive street photography. Maybe I don't yet know, even after 14 years, exactly what my voice is - but because of the intense relationship with the M, I am closer than I have ever been before.

 

I ran into a few issues.

 

Recently, I shot a cover for this magazine. The art direction, as is want to do in this industry, was taken out of my hands. Now, as a precursory point, I kind of take Araki's perspective to a degree on the fact that "each camera has it's own special aura." I take that to mean not only each individual camera, but each manufacturer.. but I digress. The point is, I shot this cover on the M240 and on an A7. I used the old 135mm Elmarit and my 75mm Summarit to shoot it. I processed each file pretty similarly, although each body/sensor had differences the shots were pretty good. Both full frame 24MP files handed over to the art director. She got to choose which ones she wanted. Blindly, without me of course urging her in whatever direction she wanted, she chose the M240 shots almost every time (I only shot with the A7 because it was a tad easier to shoot faster with it, although in retrospect it wasn't really needed). GREAT, she picked the right shots... 

 

But then she CROPPED them...

 

Even at 24 MP the M240 files were NOT good enough for a cover image. They made them duotone and gave the cover a red ink wash for a black & white photo, in someways I think it was to save their concept for the cover. I wouldn't have done it. it destroyed the image, and guess what... my name was all over it. Learned a lesson... I needed a higher resolution sensor for "studio" shots. So OBVIOUSLY the S, right? Well, maybe.

 

 

*****

 

My relationship with Leica started a few years ago when I was doing an article on my old teacher Allen Ginsberg and wanted to add a sidebar about Leica's legendary story. This was perfect timing because I also was becoming really discouraged about my own photography and losing "focus" because of all of the technology in the new DSLR and mirrorless bodies. I watched a wonderful video by Kai from DigitalRev on YouTube, with the soft drama of appropriate music and all, about how the "M was Unique" and innately I already knew this. The local Leica Store here in LA, the flagship in the states, was very helpful - as was a few folks from Leica's PR in New York and Leica USA HQ in New Jersey. I soon had an M240 to test, then the original M Monochrome. It took me awhile to get it. But I finally did. Then we worked out a couple of test shoots for the fashion side of me with the S (006). I don't need to tell anyone here how this little wonder handles, and the intense files. Love!

 

So, I have to say. I didn't go out and purchase an M right away. I had my Fuji XE-1 and kit to play with. That is, until it fell a foot onto the pavement and the EVF turned upside down and green, when I was on location in Colorado!! Not what I need in the field!! I didn't have my trusty 6D with me at the time and was forced to use the LCD screen to compose and it was frustrating. While in Colorado I went to a used camera shop and looked at a few cameras, mostly film, the owner brought out a Leica R8 and lens kit and I was very close to purchasing it (I had looked at the R8 years ago, and at the time it was out of my price range and I was just getting into digital, I had owned Minolta bodies back in the 90s and the idea of having a SLR Leica was appealing) then I asked, "Do you have any other Leicas?" He paused, then went back to his back room and came back with a M4-2. It was his personal stash. I bought it immediately, although no lens! Soon as I got back to LA I picked up a 35mm Voightlander and ran a roll of film through it, although it was frightening not knowing if I was getting the shot with the rangefinder! Soon I knew to get this right I would need a digital Leica, but I still wasn't convinced that the system would hold my attention. On Craigslist I found an old M8, perfect. I could test out my skills and really start figuring out what I was doing. Before I even developed a roll from the M4-2 I had purchased the M8 and another Color Skopar Voigtlander 25mm (so I would get the equivalent 35mm focal length on the M8). And from there, I was hooked. within a year I had my M240, had given my 6D to my daughter with all the lenses, parked the XE-1 and although I had a back-up Sony A7, the M8 and M240 became my goto cameras! I had learned, as many of us have here, how to get the best out of the system we all love, and my attention to my photography changed immeasurably. I can't say the M system changed me, but I can say that it "FOCUSED" me to where my attention was closer than it had been for my two decade relationship to photography.

 

*****

 

So as work has been "good" and my personal vision has been growing, I have noticed a need for higher resolution captures. Nothing wrong with the M240. I love it. I love the micro-contrast of the Summicron 28, Summrit 75 and even the Zeiss 50 I picked up to have a 1.5 lens (typically, I don't shoot lower than f8 but I wanted to play and not have to dig deep for a Summicron 50 right now. I still shoot film as well, with the M4-2 - even though the cloth shutter had acquired a damaged shutter due to not leaving the lens hood on and the bright California sun causing a magnifying glass effect burning a few small holes in the cloth!! - and even picked up a M7 and old CL, with the amazing Summicron-C 40mm! The M is just in a class all it's own, but there are some things it just doesn't do quite as well. So I started a search for a medium format option.

 

First I picked up a Hasselblad V series body and the 80mm Zeiss standby. Gorgeous camera and classic. However, the ground glass has been just another thing to push my sensibilities. Not bad, excellent in fact. then I picked up the Pentax 67, because I had been gifted an old Pentax 645 film camera years ago and with the little bit extra of the 6x7 format I thought it would be awesome. Film has been and is absolutely great! Practical? Not really, not when I am used to turning around a magazine editor files within a day or two after a shoot. Great cameras I will likely keep forever, but not completely what I needed. I needed something to add to my digital workflow, and get similar files that I was getting with my M. I thought of the S again, and had the Leica Store put first a 006 (SE) on hold with the kit 70mm non-CS Summicron, then let me know when a 007 came in. I tested in store both cameras, and found the rendering of the 006 more to my liking, although the 007 was likely better for a variety of tasks. I got the quotes for each, and then I sat on the idea for awhile. For a month or so my Gear Acquisition Syndrome was in high gear, and I kept looking at eBay and Craigslist on the used market to see if I could find an S used, reasonably priced. Still not sure.

 

Then I thought of the Pentax 645Z. 

 

Now I will tell you another thing about my camera ideology: I love the history and story of Leica, as a writer first and an activist, its something to me that Leica helped the Jews in Nazi Germany while say Zeiss became part of the Reich. That means something to me. It also means something to me when choosing a camera manufacturer that stands behind their products also stands behind the community, and have a strong background in what they do. In this, I like Pentax as well, and their new overlords RICOH. RICOH was a imaging company far longer than it has been a camera company. They pay attention to print technologies and are very much about how their technology reproduces imaging, being originally a company who's charter was set "to manufacture and sell sensitized paper" then later popularizing the camera bodies and more for the Japanese market. One thing I will say, getting in bed with either Leica or RICOH/PENTAX is not falling in bed with the overlords of Sony/Nikon/Canon and is supporting the sort of venerable underdogs of photography. Yay, GO TEAM!

 

I just couldn't bring myself to do get an S. I had been watching the market, and unlike the M, the S loses a SHOCKING amount of value for what you pay for it new on the used market (over 60% of the cost). Now, I would be lying if I didn't say part of the reason I have bought into the Leica system is it's resale value staying considerably high in comparison to other camera manufacturers. For instance, my Canon 6D lost 1/3rd of its value within 3 months of me purchasing it! The Fuji XE-1 over half of it's value is gone, and don't get me started about Sony's ridiculous, "upgrade" seemingly every three months or so. There are NO camera manufacturers in 2016 that make a "bad" camera it seems, but what are you really getting? Digital obsolescence is a very real thing. My grandfather used to say, "we aren't rich enough to buy cheap." That said, I just couldn't force myself to get the wonderful S knowing that it wouldn't be anything more than half the value I paid for it even a MONTH after purchasing it, but I needed a medium format option. Being a Pentax 645 user I was used to Pentax and had heard good things. I had to get something, and if not Leica (not yet anyway) it was between the CCD 645D and the CMOS 645Z. I chose the 645Z, but I'm not sure I'll keep it.

 

There are some concerns with the 645Z system, and I post this here because over in the Pentax Forums it seems no one wants to address my concerns. Here I am guys, home with Leica!!

 

 

1) I obviously regularly shoot with my M240, or M8. Let's stick with the M240 because it has a CMOS sensor like the 645Z. Now, I love the larger file format and potential for detail but something is amiss. Even without an AA filter, and mind-blowing dynamic range of the 645Z, I just can't seem to get the images to come close to being as good and as much micro-contrast as the M. My question is, is the M with M glass really that much better at - for lack of a better word - shaping a photo?

 

2) Over at the Pentax Forums, some users are stating that my images are "crushing the blacks", implying no amount of photo technique help or lens choices would matter because even if I were to put Contax or Hassy glass on my 645Z I would not notice. It's kind of disturbing that the type of imagery I do would make it to where I am unconsolable, and the forum people are "not able to help." I don't buy it.

 

3) I'm really trying to get to the bottom of the biggest differences here, but the RICOH/Pentax users won't just say "its because it isn't a Leica" they won't. I don't want to buy it either, because I think I can make some pretty incredible images with the 645Z, but if I have to work at it, and an old S2 would do me better.. then so be it.

 

I'm attaching some files from both the M240 and the Pentax 645Z here, mostly unprocessed so you can see maybe what I am going for, and one file that I have processed from the Z so you can see what I have to go through.

 

Can anyone here help me on this journey? What am I missing?

 

 

NOTE: the first 2 files are from the 645Z and the last 2 the M240. In another post I may post some of my S (006) files from a previous shoot to compare, if there is interest. The lighting for both cameras was set the same, as a hotshoe flashgun set similarly.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

645Z

 

645Z

 

M240

 

M240

 

 

 

 

[Manoleica]

Hi, I've read and reread your Post.. Forgetting the images you Posted (I am not overwhelmed).. From your listings of cameras and lenses I get the feeling you are looking for the holy grail, agreed that some lenses can offer a different look, IMHO it's also to do with

many many other factors.. Jumping from one brand to another always causes conflict of results.. Unless you get a signed agreement Not to in any way alter your original and accepted image (Magnum)...editors will play with what they purchase.. Yes, the S may well suit you better, on the other hand it may just be a case of G A S..

[bilbrown]

Hi, I've read and reread your Post.. Forgetting the images you Posted (I am not overwhelmed).. From your listings of cameras and lenses I get the feeling you are looking for the holy grail, agreed that some lenses can offer a different look, IMHO it's also to do with

many many other factors.. Jumping from one brand to another always causes conflict of results.. Unless you get a signed agreement Not to in any way alter your original and accepted image (Magnum)...editors will play with what they purchase.. Yes, the S may well suit you better, on the other hand it may just be a case of G A S..

 

 

No sure what not being "overwhelmed" has to do with my post. Not everyone enjoys my images, or ones like it. I'm okay with that.

 

 

Yes, it may be GAS, but it may also be that the S has the rendering I need.

[RobertGeorge]

Your images a great. You've got a clear aesthetic, which is further than most tend to get with their photography. 

 

I've tried many different systems, like yourself, and the S is the first system I've stuck on. Two years now. It's the lenses and the viewfinder – I feel that my shots are closer to what I envision when pressing the shutter than any other system I've used. That's the simplest way to put it. 

 

There are quirks – I'm on the S2-p, the oldest and slowest in the system – but I know what the camera will do and what it won't do. With the 100mm mounted I'm close to the DSLR experience: over the shoulder and round a city for 8 hours, no problem. Solid AF (not perfect,) the best optics and viewfinder I've used, and a simple interface. 

 

I'm heading in to a photography MFA this September, and that means funding. At any other point in my photographic life I'd be plotting what equipment I can buy with this money. I'm not. Oddly, I'm happy with what I've got. 

[mgrayson3]

My 2 cents - this is not something you can decide. Some systems are a constant fight, some feel like natural tools. And it's a different decision for every photographer. It's not even system specific. I love the handling of a Canon 1-series bodies. The smaller ones leave me cold. I could never get used to a rangefinder (had an M9 for years - loved the output - hated using it). I adore the Q and the S. Love tech cams. Hate Sonys. Better photographers than me have exactly the opposite preferences. So what?

 

Try them. It's the only way. If you like using it, you'll get the output you want. If it's too much work to get the output you want, you'll find that out quickly.

 

Best,

 

Matt

[Manolo Laguillo]

You will enjoy the Leica S very much.

 

The main factors which make different cameras being different are handling (body shape, weight, way of framing, ergonomics...). If you are a big guy with big hands a tiny camera won't suit you...

 

Musicians must adapt themselves to the instrument, and there are instances where this can be very painful, with injuries happening (I know about this because I have many friends which are musicians). They don't come to the idea of customizing an instrument, modifying its shape, etc.

 

We photographers don't have this problem. There are many different types of 'photographic instruments'.

 

The results are now always on a very high level. Everything works very well.

[bilbrown]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You will enjoy the Leica S very much.

 

The main factors which make different cameras being different are handling (body shape, weight, way of framing, ergonomics...). If you are a big guy with big hands a tiny camera won't suit you...

 

Musicians must adapt themselves to the instrument, and there are instances where this can be very painful, with injuries happening (I know about this because I have many friends which are musicians). They don't come to the idea of customizing an instrument, modifying its shape, etc.

 

We photographers don't have this problem. There are many different types of 'photographic instruments'.

 

The results are now always on a very high level. Everything works very well.

 

 

 

I did test the Typ 006 awhile back. there is something i can't quite put my finger on that makes me lean back to it. I have only tested the Typ 007 in store, so don't know, but expect similar render according to lens choice.

 

here are a few of the shots. Thoughts?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[bilbrown]

One more the S Typ 006 edited.

 

It is a 200% crop from about 30 feet away.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[siddhaarta]

I had a small M 240 System but sold it in order to buy my S007 System. I would say that the two CMOS sensors behave very, very similar, only one has more resolution, obviously. So if you have worked with the M, you know what will be waiting for you. I personally would prefer the Sony Sensor on the Pentax because it is much more malleable. This is not to say the Leica sensor is bad, it is not.

 

On the other hand the Leica S lenses are wonderful and I can't see any competition from Pentax. For me this was decisive, the lenses.

 

Obviously there are so many Leica M lenses with special character that if you have some favorites there (say Noctilux or older Mandler designs), it is not so easy/impossible to find the same in the S line-up. But the S line up is a real family with similar characteristics. Technically perfect but also with - difficult to describe - character, very natural (especially the bokeh), some say almost film like. Not at all clinical as some have stated.

 

I am a happy camper.

[bilbrown]

I had a small M 240 System but sold it in order to buy my S007 System. I would say that the two CMOS sensors behave very, very similar, only one has more resolution, obviously. So if you have worked with the M, you know what will be waiting for you. I personally would prefer the Sony Sensor on the Pentax because it is much more malleable. This is not to say the Leica sensor is bad, it is not.

 

On the other hand the Leica S lenses are wonderful and I can't see any competition from Pentax. For me this was decisive, the lenses.

 

Obviously there are so many Leica M lenses with special character that if you have some favorites there (say Noctilux or older Mandler designs), it is not so easy/impossible to find the same in the S line-up. But the S line up is a real family with similar characteristics. Technically perfect but also with - difficult to describe - character, very natural, some say almost film like. Not at all clinical as some have stated.

 

I am a happy camper.

 

 

 

Yes, this is kind of what I am seeing. 

 

I have found some interesting file structures with the Pentax 55 and the Sony sensor in the 645Z. Here is one.

 

It's so hard!!!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[bilbrown]

I think the CMOS sensor of the Z may have too much dynamic range... but I am liking this 200% crop with my post (in PS, not LR).

 

But I would like to put the Typ 007 and a similar focal length against it.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[siddhaarta]

Too much DR .. I can't imagine that, but I am more a landscape and nature kind of guy ...

 

But if I were in portrait and fashion, I would love the 100mm Summicron … after some tests, I even am considering to buy it for landscapes, because of its rendering.

[siddhaarta]

Interesting your analysis regarding corporate history and responsibility, which maybe puts Pentax and Leica in a similar field.

 

On the other hand, the ergonomic philosophy between the two is just the opposite, with the myriads of buttons and the traditional box design of the Z on the one hand, and the Leica layout with only the on/off button labeled and the DSLR style body design on the other hand.

 

I personally prefer by far the Leica approach, not only because of the aesthetic aspect. It has proven very practical in day to day use.

[bilbrown]

Interesting your analysis regarding corporate history and responsibility, which maybe puts Pentax and Leica in a similar field.

 

On the other hand, the ergonomic philosophy between the two is just the opposite, with the myriads of buttons and the traditional box design of the Z on the one hand, and the Leica layout with only the on/off button labeled and the DSLR style body design on the other hand.

 

I personally prefer by far the Leica approach, not only because of the aesthetic aspect. It has proven very practical in day to day use.

 

 

 

I totally agree. The Pentax is like way too button heavy.

 

But the RICOH GR is pretty minimal and awesome.

[bilbrown]

Too much DR .. I can't imagine that, but I am more a landscape and nature kind of guy ...

 

But if I were in portrait and fashion, I would love the 100mm Summicron … after some tests, I even am considering to buy it for landscapes, because of its rendering.

 

 

I think there was a study done that dynamic range is actually just pushing the highest (lowest number) ISO light sensitivity from the sensor. So it would make sense that the higher the dynamic range (over 3200/6400 in modern CMOS sensors, and over 320/640/800 in CCD sensors) is mostly software based - not native to the hardware, and therefore is not the optimal result or image making for the sensor.

 

But I could be way off base, I am no technician.

[bilbrown]

I do have to say, the "Leica glow" is quite apparent in this image from the S Typ 006

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

... over the Z

 

 

 

That has to be the glass.

[Guest chipcarterdc]

That has to be the glass.

Or the lighting. Or the model. Or the angle. Or the combination of all of those with the glass.

 

There are a lot of differences between those two images (which are both very nice, by the way) other than/in addition to a "Leica glow".

[Manolo Laguillo]

If I understand you well, you are sort of flirting with the idea of changing from the Pentax MF to the Leica S.

 

In this context I really don't understand why you are showing these photos, bilbrown: I'm unable to make the relation between them and your 'technical doubts'...

[bilbrown]

If I understand you well, you are sort of flirting with the idea of changing from the Pentax MF to the Leica S.

 

In this context I really don't understand why you are showing these photos, bilbrown: I'm unable to make the relation between them and your 'technical doubts'...

 

 

 

I just am trying to see the biggest difference between the output.

 

There is an obvious difference and in the end I guess it only matters what camera I will pick up to use. Which one is easier to get my desired result, and which one takes work.

 

They are both more than adequate.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mgrayson3]

Or the lighting. Or the model. Or the angle. Or the combination of all of those with the glass.

 

There are a lot of differences between those two images (which are both very nice, by the way) other than/in addition to a "Leica glow".

 

Well said! I was going to get pompous and quote:

 

One is Light

Two is Composition

Three is Everything Else

(I don't know where I heard that, but it should be at the top of any discussion of camera gear)

 

On the other hand, If you're an amateur (like me), there is a different version (this one is mine)

 

Shots I've missed because of:

Insufficient resolution - 0.5%

Insufficient DR - 1%

Missed focus - 20%

Insufficient talent/vision - 70%

Sitting in front of computer - 95%

 

(There's overlap)

 

The point being that anything that improves the last two is MUCH more valuable than the first two.

 

Best,

 

Matt